Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

232++++ Cause WE SAID SO !! ++++

Expand Messages
  • buddiebuddiee
    Oct 6, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear List Subscriber,

      As I often say, this is now entirely a propaganda war. I do not
      believe that politely asking the system to tell the truth, or to obey
      the law, will work. HOWEVER, playing the system's game CAN create
      some rather interesting ammunition for the propaganda war.

      Someone I know named Ken Evans filed a suit in district court to try
      to get back what he had previously paid. The suit was based largely
      on the 861 evidence.

      In its "opinion" the court never MENTIONED Section 861, or any of the
      regulations under it. That's right, the court failed to mention
      ANYTHING about the part of the law which was the CENTRAL FOCUS of the
      suit. But wait, it gets even better.

      Though I trust the courts about as much as I trust the Mafia (and I'm
      not saying Mr. Evans expected to get justice), judicial procedures do
      allow for some interesting events. For example, it is usual for
      parties to file "interrogatories," asking for information or answers
      from the other side. After all, clarifying what the points of
      disagreement are is a rational thing to do before trying to settle
      the disagreement. So Mr. Evans filed interrogatories, asking
      questions very similar to those we have asked of all sorts of
      government officials in the past. The very FIRST question was this:

      "Are 26 USC § 861 and the related regulations beginning at 26 CFR §
      1.861-8, applicable in determining Plaintiff's taxable income from
      sources within the United States in the instant case?"

      Look familiar? Guess what the answer was. There wasn't one. The
      DOJ was supposed to answer, and at one point said it was GOING to
      answer. But it never did. Then the court ORDERED the DOJ to answer
      the questions. Still no answers. Then guess how the COURT answered
      the questions.

      It didn't. NO ONE ever answered the questions. Like I've said
      before, they don't know what their OWN stupid position is. All
      the "opinion" covered was the general definition in Section 61. The
      entire trial happened without ANYONE from the government (the judge
      or the DOJ) ever saying what their OWN position is on 861. Basically
      the message of the "ruling" was "your income is taxable cuz we said
      so, and we don't need no stinkin' LAW to prove it!"

      Here is Mr. Evans' press release about the case:
      http://www.reasons2vote.com/pressrelease10-6-03.html

      And here is the court's (worthless) "opinion":
      http://www.reasons2vote.com/order2000pg1.html

      ---------------------------------------

      If that does NOT seem strange to any of you, one of us is in the
      wrong country. I can't stress enough how insane this is. The
      regulations say IN PLAIN ENGLISH that Mr. Evans SHOULD use 861(b) and
      1.861-8 to determine his taxable domestic income. (See 26 CFR §§
      1.861-1(a)(1), 1.861-1(b), 1.861-8(a)(1), 1.862-1(b), 1.863-1(c),
      etc.) To say that it is "frivolous" for Mr. Evans to believe he
      should use those sections--in light of the citations just quoted--is
      just... I can't think of a nasty enough word for it.

      But what happened is even WORSE. Neither the DOJ nor the judge could
      even SAY whether Mr. Evans should use those sections or not. Even
      after being ORDERED by the court to answer, the DOJ still wouldn't.
      (Make no mistake: if you or I acted that way, we'd be in prison for
      contempt of court.) And the case ended without ANYONE from the
      government saying what their OWN position was on the specifics.

      I hope you all realize how utterly looney the situation has become.
      We do not have the rule of law in this country. We have the rule
      of "cuz I said so." (Personally, I wouldn't want to be that judge or
      those DOJ attorneys when the truth becomes widely known.)

      Sincerely,


      Larken Rose
      larken@...
      http://www.theft-by-deception.com